Tamiflu psychosis
Just when AARP magazine and so many other highly respected and widely read publications publish articles on pandemic flu planning for personal homes, plus bad news. This news is not for publications, nor for your readers, but for authors who have linked your name to poorly researched advice. On November 14, 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Roche Laboratories, Inc., maker of Tamiflu, announced that new labeling would be provided for this highly publicized pandemic influenza drug. It turns out that Tamiflu is just one more drug to be added to the long list of drugs recently implicated in “self-harm” (suicide) and other psychiatric side effects.
While the data is not entirely clear as to how much of the hallucinations and confusion associated with the administration of Tamiflu in the Far East is related to influenza and how much is directly related to the drug, several things are clear.
1. Those who received Tamiflu are much more likely to exhibit “abnormal behavior” and “self-harm” than those who have not received the drug.
2. The likelihood of having these side effects increases as the dose increases and the length of time the drug is taken increases.
Tamiflu is one of two drugs available for the treatment of pandemic influenza. Unfortunately, the pandemic strain currently being studied in Asia (H5: N1) already shows resistance to normal doses of Tamiflu. In fact, in recent cases the dose of Tamiflu has had to be doubled and the duration of treatment has also doubled. To further complicate this fact, there is a need in these cases to add the second drug against pandemic influenza, also in double dose and double treatment duration.
What does this mean for psychiatric side effects? It means that these side effects will increase, if not arithmatically, then legally. In other words, the side effects may not only double, but quadruple or more.
Common sense and good science are at stake for alarmists who encourage the general public to stock up on Tamiflu or any other drug. Storing medications “just in case” is always a bad idea. Most simple infections are now resistant to basic antibiotics because patients have accumulated “leftover” antibiotics from previous infections and started them on their own. For too many decades, doctors have sent patients home with antibiotics “just in case” for the “next time” they get sick. This technique is lazy and it is the medical profession that is responsible for the problems we now see as a result of this lazy approach to healthcare.
What is surprising is that the American public stands up for it. If you took your car to your favorite mechanic to have the oil changed and he sent you home with an extra box of oil “just in case,” you would change mechanics. If you went to your favorite hairdresser for a color and style, and she sent you home with an extra pair of scissors “just in case” you would quickly switch stylists or at least think she was crazy. This style of medical practice was born out of the same medical arrogance that allowed doctors to think they were “gods” and should have died with that mindset. The most recent announcements from the US Food and Drug Administration on the risks of psychiatric side effects in Tamiflu only point to the dangers of a good medication taken the wrong way or for the wrong indication. Prescribing any medication is a balance of risks and benefits, and by balancing the risks and benefits, we can all use good advice, doctors and patients alike.